PR Disasters Chapter 15

[FenellaFeldman]

The saga continues

Exactly! , I can remember the deaths of ( celebrities) that meant more to me , it was a shock when Diana died but that was all , felt bad for her children but life moves on!

Ah so then yes she is targeting the Uk but why? 🤷‍♀️

She must have forgotten about Geneva already!

They can claim all they want that they are not exploiting their kids, that doesn’t make it true though.

When the woman who bleats constantly that she is the most bullied person in the world, then publicly uses her own kids for PR, you have to question her ethics.

Amusing article in The Mail today. I couldn't read it because it's behind the paywall, but from the comments the writer is suggesting that because the Wales children don't have birthday portraits in bare feet they are to be pitied compared to Lilibet.

Obviously the writer would have us believe the Wales children spend all day in collars and ties and never run in the garden. It is quite the reach to say the least.

But we can't see their faces.

Seems to be the illogical clapback.

The charity that Meghan went to Geneva to speak on behalf of need to publicly disassociate themselves from her. What she does with her children completely undermines the message of those poor parents. It’s cynical and hypocritical. There is absolutely no need at all for pictures of the Sussex children to appear online, ever. This is choice behaviour on the part of their parents, who are exploiting them. I am not surprised by Meghan, but after all Harry’s clamouring about his terrible childhood in the public eye, he should be vetoing this stuff. Although, as I have postulated before, think they are weird enough to have struck a deal between them so that one of the kids can be touted around the internet for clicks and the other one gets to keep more of his privacy. Which is bloody weird.

As an aside, Harry looks ghastly in that pic. He needs to do something about his hair - it needs to be shaved off, it looks awful. Many men go bald, he needs to accept it with grace. What next? A combover?

It wasn’t a charity, it was the World Health Organisation, funded by the taxpayers of various nations and mysterious donations from billionaires with agendas attached, and which has faced allegations of being not fit for purpose and corrupt. Internet censorship to save the children is very much outside their remit.

Bizarre fabrication. As if the Wales' children's birthday portraits feature them in stiff collars, sitting on hard chairs! The author isn't only ill informed, but a cursory glance would show Louis and Charlotte also in bare feet, in shorts, on the beach, playing cricket, or otherwise in a woodland or an otherwise outdoor, informal setting.
I think it's just a bit of desperation. Hard to defend the actions of H&M, so just make stuff up about the Wales family. I think it's a bit sad, really.

From the little we have seen of both children they are strongly Markle/Ragland, not Windsor and definitely not Spencer. I think the partial photos are to disguise this.

I’m afraid L puts me in mind of the hippy kids we used to see around our way years ago, all Clothkits and filthy fingernails.

The straggled hair and bare feet is deliberate. It conveys the relaxed casual lifestyle that is free from constraints of royal life. It’s deliberately the opposite of the Wales children and I’m probably reading too much into it but it feels like the children are being used as a prop in their family feud.
Her hair is beautiful. I wish they’d brush it.

True, but as I said, we know that the Wales family have an outdoor, sporting life, and their birthday pictures show them in shorts and with bare feet. Charlotte had her hair loose.
It's all just a bit silly. They should try to enjoy their lives and move on.

I find the neglected urchin look for Lili an odd choice for meghan.
She's so perfectly staged in every other area of her life: the perfect home maker, fashionista, glowed make up, perfect love story etc but she never does the hippy can't be arsed with superficial appearance vibe.
Except with Lili.

It's definitely a look you see some parents go for: wild, free, hippy, revel in nature.
But it's really not meghan. Ever. Except with Lili.

And it's quite an extreme version. Hair never brushed, shoes never on, cheap looking cotton dresses.
Why?

Alternative theory: Lili is a little madam who refuses to have her hair brushed and she decides if and when she wears shoes (no shoes at Disney was weird.) Harry let's her do whatever she wants because he's just a child himself and doesn't know how to parent. Meghan is too focused on herself and her projects to focus on parenting Lili. Nannies are so scared of the parents Lili just gets to do whatever she wants.

It’s a competition only the Sussexes are in. The Waleses aren’t bothering to compete. They don’t need to.

Straggled hair is exactly right.

It's a weird idea that unkempt children are happier?
In fact they are often just overlooked or not a priority.

Long hair on a little girl takes attention. By an adult. It needs careful washing. Brushing daily to ensure horrible knots don't form and often putting up or pulling back to be out of the way in activities.

Long stragggled hair always loose is going to cause a child problems.

Fine after a long day at the beach.
But always straggled, unbrushed, loose? It starts to look more like low level neglect by the parents rather than free happy kids.

Spot on, @StrawberryWasp

I'm not sure we can draw any conclusions from the photos because we all know that Meghan presents what she wants us to see and neither she nor Harry let the truth get in the way of whatever point they think they are making. Lilibet had her hair tied up in the wardrobe photo for example so I think the loose hair is a deliberate choice and probably not reflective of the reality of her life.

If I was going out on a limb I would speculate that The Mail opinion piece is the conclusion they want us to draw.

Every image is so contrived to either compete or clap back at the Wales, as well as public speculation. Remember the comments about lack of photos of Archie? Up he pops.
It’s so childish. And I really wouldn’t put it past them to be reading what we write on here , they are so thin skinned and controlling.

I don't think it's fair to draw conclusions about a little girl's character and personality, or the Sussexes parenting, from the birthday pictures.
I just think that issuing birthday pictures is completely unnecessary, and they should afford the child more privacy.

I don’t know why we have to see any photos at all. Just celebrate privately. I know it’s a thing for some people to live their lives on line, but if you are ‘the most trolled person’ then surely you try to shield your children from that.
The barefoot loose hair vibe is definitely chosen as a contrast to ‘those poor Wales’ children growing up in that awful institution, look at us we’re free’ pathetic H and M need to grow the fuck up.

From childhood photos both H and MM had “difficult” hair, so it’s likely their children do too. Speaking as one who knows, no amount of brushing makes difficult hair tidy, the ends will always be straggly, you either have to blow dry it straight if short (see William and Harry as children) or tie it up if long. Or both.

I would think that L probably doesn’t tolerate her hair being blow dried and plaiting is too British and buttoned up.

Plus she has two besotted parents who see her very differently from how she actually looks, because that’s what parents do.

MM has described L as a “firecracker”. I think a lot can be deduced from that.

But she also described Harry as a fox 🤷‍♀️

Was thinking the same. Probably Archie took the photo with his Leica. All three subjects are unkempt, the lighting is off and the focus is too tight. Even my inexpert eye can see that.

They should have got Alexi Lubomirksi again. Bonus being that he's rather easy on the eye.

https://www.townandcountrymag.com/society/g14479097/alexi-lubomirski-royal-photographer-facts/

I'm not 'drawing conclusions' I specifically said 'alternative theory'.

And I have no qualms about speculating about the children based on the content H&M put out for public consumption.

I'm just consuming what they want me to comsume.

The speculation that will take place is because of the actions of their parents. They have a responsibility to protect their children and they are not doing it.

Use your children as content.
Invite scrutiny and speculation.
That's the deal with the devil they are taking.

I have no patience with the argument that they can use their children for our attention, and we may look, but not interpret or speculate on the content.

No.
That's not the deal.
The public aren't responsible for looking and commenting. The parents are responsible for not protecting their children from the comment.